Would switch to other brands

The great Maggi con job: How their ads have been fooling you for years

Screengrab from a Maggi ad

For years Maggi fooled you into believing that you could cook. It also attempted to convince you that it takes only '2 minutes' to make. And it assured you that Maggi noodles, with or without MSG, was a square meal and could be substituted for breakfast, lunch or dinner.

Honestly, nobody sane actually believed any of that, yet Maggi noodles was a staple diet of many. Maybe it was the intense craving you got when you inhaled the typical masala aroma or maybe it was the TV ads that made you hungry by just looking at the noodles cooking any place any time, but something about Maggi had a large part of India captivated or conned, whatever you prefer to call it.

Here is a look at the different Maggi ads over the years that promised things that could not possibly be completely true.

Since the 1980s, Maggi ads featured a mother feeding her children the noodles, giving the not-so-subtle message that it is 'fast to cook' for moms and 'good to eat' for kids.

There were also a group of kids singing aloud and dancing in typical 1990s style because they have to wait for only 2 minutes when they are hungry or when they are with friends because that's how long it takes to make Maggi noodles.

And if mothers and children did not convince you, there was superstar Amitabh Bachchan narrating heart-warming stories of how Maggi has touched the lives of ordinary Indians and telling youngsters that the best way to combat their big hunger after a big day is to eat a big pack of Maggi noodles.

Or Madhuri Dixit being the 'perfect' mom by dancing and playing football with her children to assure both them and the viewer that 'health can be enjoyable' because Maggi noodles are now made of oats and therefore it is the best breakfast for kids.

A Maggi mom also tried to assure families all over that one bowl of the noodles = 3 rotis + vegetables. Now who wouldn't want to believe that there is a better tasting alternative to the boring roti-sabzi routine!

'Maggi-mom' seems to be recurring trend because the brand also tried to convince all mothers that if they want to make their child feel special and make them happy, all they have to do is rustle up a bowl of Maggi in '2 minutes' because it is 'khushion ki reciepe' (recipe for happiness) after all.

That's not all, even young women can convince their protective moms that they are old enough to live independently if they pass the Maggi test - cook the noodles just like her. Because Maggi-making abilities is all the proof your mom needs to let you live alone.

It won’t even take two minutes to figure out that lead in your Maggi is the least of India’s food safety problems. This is a country where two dozen children died in one fell swoop after their free lunch at school – rice, beans, potato curry and soy balls. India Today lets us know that much of that delicious street chaat Delhi is famous for could be contaminated with fecal matter, the E. Coli bacteria in particular. Where the Most Probably Number (MPN) of coliform bacteria should be 50 or less, it was as high as 2,400 in some of those delicious snacks. And Girish Shahane writes inScroll.in that the “greatest lead-related scandal” is not about paint or Maggi but that “manufacturers of ayurvedic medications are permitted to use toxic heavy metals like lead, mercury, and arsenic” and he’s not buying the claim that the ayurvedic purification process of sodhana removes their toxicity.

So why this kolaveri about two-minute noodles?

It’s because Maggi was more than just a packet of instant noodles. In a socialist India where Coca Cola was forbidden and we wore rip-off Lavis jeans, Maggi in 1983 felt almost like cosmopolitanism in a packet. It was bright, it was perky, it was fast. It broke the rules of cooking. It was not labour intensive. Nothing needed to be chopped, ground or grated. It carried a whiff of independence. Anyone could do it. And it still had a masala flavour. There was an East-meets-West, home-meets-world feel about Maggi and its promise of instant gratification in our land of roti-chawal. That’s why as India opened up to the world, and many other kinds of instant foods and heat-and-serve horrors flooded the supermarkets, Maggi survived without even adding any new and exciting flavours. It was by then a classic. The brand had become the product – like Xerox and Google. Everyone had a Maggi memory – the schoolchild’s tiffin, the hostel student’s dinner, the newly-married working couple’s trusty stand-by. Unlike instant noodles in the US which was the epitome of the sad bachelor with a hot-plate, Maggi managed to sell itself in India as piping hot mother’s love.

No wonder in the new India, Maggi has acquired what Firstpost’s Rajyasree Sen describes as a sort of “grunge cool” where once-cheap Maggi can cost Rs 300 and come with Arrabiata sauce or even drizzled with truffle oil and topped with pan-seared Foie gras. This, says Sen, is simply “nostalgia-themed food fancy-dress party.”

Now it turns out that, forget fancy dress, the emperor has no clothes. The bad news keeps piling on. Lead. MSG. A temporary distribution halt in Kerala, a law suit in Uttar Pradesh, an FIR against its celebrity brand ambassadors in Bihar. The Future Group, the country's biggest retailer has decided to stop stocking Maggi. Nestle claims its in-house tests and an independent laboratory have confirmed the product is “safe to eat” and lead levels are within “permissible” limits.

But the real leaden feeling is about a feeling of betrayal. We could forgive Maggi for always taking more than those promised two minutes to cook but it's harder to forgive a betrayal of nostalgia. It’s akin to when Coke, America’s iconic drink, that had marketed itself as American-ness in a bottle, found itself dubbed “Killer Coke” because of stories of health hazards. Bloomberg News reported that in the 1970s, the average person doubled the amount of soda they drank. By 1980s it had overtaken tap water. But by 2005 soda consumption had started dropping and they have not stopped. Americans still drink 450 cans a year but the fizz is gone. “We actually believe if you let this go too long, another three or five years, the consumer will walk away from carbonated soft drinks,” worries Indra Nooyi, the CEO of PepsiCo.

Maggi, says a colleague, seems to be having its "Coca Cola moment".

Except Maggi is in a worse bind because Coca Cola only marketed itself as “Life Tastes Good” not as “Life Tastes Healthy”.

Maggi however promised “Taste bhi health bhi”. That’s where the betrayal stings more. Maggi’s sunny cheery ads promised us a snack that kids loved and mothers could serve without feeling any deep-fried guilt. An analysis of Maggi’s marketing strategy clearly says “it was positioned as a hygienic home-made snack, a smart move.” But Nestle realized quickly that its target in India was not the working woman. It was really children and “quickly a strategy was developed to capture the kids segment with various tools of sales promotion like pencils, fun books, Maggi clubs.”

But it also sold itself to the mothers. Maggi promised to provide 20 percent of RDA of calcium and protein. And while it never experimented with flavours it introduced Atta and Dal Atta noodles and Maggi Oat noodles to sell that dream of a fun and convenient snack with nutritional value. Madhuri Dixit, Preity Zinta and Amitabh Bachchan were roped in to underscore that messaging. Zinta emphasized the “fun” part, Dixit the “good mommy” part and the gravitas of Big B sealed the deal. Lock kiya jaye basically. When Cup O Maggi hit the market its positioning was "Healthy Snack Anywhere, Anytime".

Of course in our heart of hearts we knew it was too good to be true. As graphic novelist Samit Basu quipped on Twitter “Business idea: nuclear shelters made out of solid Maggi.” There was even a series of playful #twominutemaggi poems that had its fifteen seconds of fame on Twitter where Maggi mostly rhymed with “saggy” and “baggy”.

As Rajyasree Sen points out “you have to be slightly dim to think that instead of making three chapatis for your child or pouring him or her a bowl of oats” you can just snip open a packet of Maggi and conjure up a “nutritious meal thanks to some Madhuri Maggic.” Maggi just allowed us to be lazy and feel vaguely virtuous about it.

But it is also true that Maggi pushed that health message in ways big and small. While it never played around with its flavours it experimented with packet size, slashing prices to woo lower income Indians, very consciously targeting theBoP or Bottom of Pyramid customer. Maggi Rasile Chow and Masala-ae-Magic were very much about Nestle going all out for the hinterland and low-income market. Rasile Chow writes DNA was “especially developed for rural/semi-urban markets to provide ‘a low-cost tasty light meal that is fortified with iron’” while Masala-e-Magic was fortified with iron, iodine and Vitamin A and offered up as the gift of the Maggi bearing the micronutrient versions of gold, frankincense and myrrh. This was Maggi the Good “leveraging its strength to drive affordable nutrition.”

It’s that word “nutrition” that’s now coming back to haunt Maggi and land its celebrity endorsers into a soup. Another Maggie was famously not for turning but will this Maggi just have to eat its words?

Or as Nilanjana Roy wrote almost presciently in one of those #TwoMinuteMaggi poems:
My heart was fine, but now it's droopy/ Like overcooked #Maggi, mushy and soupy.

Yes because they are cashing in on the trade off btw the bad effects of Sugar v/s Aspartame . But Aspartame and sucralose are not recommended for consumption by kids... While Maggi Noodles has been found unhealthy because of high lead content.. they say they don't add MSG which is another substance banned for consumption by children under 12 years.

Yes because they are cashing in on the trade off btw the bad effects of Sugar v/s Aspartame . But Aspartame and sucralose are not recommended for consumption by kids... While Maggi Noodles has been found unhealthy because of high lead content.. they say they don't add MSG which is another substance banned for consumption by children under 12 years.

Click to expand...

MSG is not bad for health. Only half hacks think it to be so. Don't believe them. MSG- Mono sodium glutamate. Glutamate is a non essential amino acid. Consuming it is not bad for health. This is why I am extremely sceptical about this decision to ban maggi. I am sure the decision has been taken by a half baked moronic bureaucrat

And chemical composition is not the only reason sugar free diet is BS- The truth is there is no need for sugar free food in the first place. The amount of sugars- 15-20g added to coffee makes hardly a difference of 20kcals or more in a diet plan comprising of 2300kcal per day. So how exactly is cutting 20-30kcals off tour diet going to help you when you are taking 2300kcal from other sources is beyond logic and reason

Its prompted the Global CEO of Nestle to hold a press conference and they are withdrawing their stocks all over because they fear a national ban by the govt. My only worry is that multinationals and Indian companies must be getting away with blue murder because of shoddy and infrequent quality and health checks of packaged food products.

MSG is not bad for health. Only half hacks think it to be so. Don't believe them. MSG- Mono sodium glutamate. Glutamate is a non essential amino acid. Consuming it is not bad for health. This is why I am extremely sceptical about this decision to ban maggi. I am sure the decision has been taken by a half baked moronic bureaucrat

Its about how much the total consumption adds up to in one day... Especially if one is a diabetic or counting calories. Sugar is found in most food we consume, but it makes sense to avoid direct sugar intake.

And chemical composition is not the only reason sugar free diet is BS- The truth is there is no need for sugar free food in the first place. The amount of sugars- 15-20g added to coffee makes hardly a difference of 20kcals or more in a diet plan comprising of 2300kcal per day. So how exactly is cutting 20-30kcals off tour diet going to help you when you are taking 2300kcal from other sources is beyond logic and reason

Its about how much the total consumption adds up to in one day... Especially if one is a diabetic or counting calories. Sugar is found in most food we consume, but it makes sense to avoid direct sugar intake.

Click to expand...

why because diabetes is about blood sugar and so sugar should be avoided?

I don't blame you . even most doctors have the same stupid opinion.

Anyway, I will try explaining why it is stupid for the benefit of forum members here

A cup of coffee as typically consumed by Indians have milk in it which itself lactose and fat . so usually a cup of coffee usually has about 200kcal of calories. If a person is going to take sugar free coffee, it would hardly reduce the cal content by 20kcals Max. So instead of 200kcal, they would be consuming 180kcal.

The daily requirement of sugar by the normal person is 2300kcals. So tell me how exactly is reducing 20kcals doing to achieve anything wrt 2300kcals?

Its prompted the Global CEO of Nestle to hold a press conference and they are withdrawing their stocks all over because they fear a national ban by the govt. My only worry is that multinationals and Indian companies must be getting away with blue murder because of shoddy and infrequent quality and health checks of packaged food products.

Click to expand...

Of course they are worried. You should be too when you have incompetent hacks running the food administration. Hacks who think MSG is harmful from a half baked article on some random useless website.

These morons would ban dihydrogen monoxide , if some article claims that it causes certain death and has 100% addiction potential and is freely sold in the market without any oversight.

why because diabetes is about blood sugar and so sugar should be avoided?

I don't blame you . even most doctors have the same stupid opinion.

Anyway, I will try explaining why it is stupid for the benefit of forum members here

A cup of coffee as typically consumed by Indians have milk in it which itself lactose and fat . so usually a cup of coffee usually has about 200kcal of calories. If a person is going to take sugar free coffee, it would hardly reduce the cal content by 20kcals Max. So instead of 200kcal, they would be consuming 180kcal.

The daily requirement of sugar by the normal person is 2300kcals. So tell me how exactly is reducing 20kcals doing to achieve anything wrt 2300kcals?

Click to expand...

A glass of milk is 100kcals, and for a cup of coffee people don't even use half a glass. But even half a glass would still only be 50kcals, so how do you get 200kcals in a cup of coffee?

A glass of milk is 100kcals, and for a cup of coffee people don't even use half a glass. But even half a glass would still only be 50kcals, so how do you get 200kcals in a cup of coffee?

Click to expand...

Depends on the size of the glass. Duh.

200ml milk has 140 cals. Anyway, I was talking about the worst case scenario.

@Rashna BTW, one teaspoon of sugar only has 16kcals. So tell me how does removing 16-30kcals going to help if the whole coffee itself is going to have hardly 200kcals, specially when the calorie requirement is 2300kcal per day

200ml milk has 140 cals. Anyway, I was talking about the worst case scenario.

@Rashna BTW, one teaspoon of sugar only has 16kcals. So tell me how does removing 16-30kcals going to help if the whole coffee itself is going to have hardly 200kcals, specially when the calorie requirement is 2300kcal per day

Click to expand...

Not everything is about calories. Sugar taken in this manner, even in small amounts, can lead to insulin spike. This triggers the body to store fat. Slowly the body may become insulin resistant, and that's not a good thing.

Not everything is about calories. Sugar taken in this manner, even in small amounts, can lead to insulin spike. This triggers the body to store fat. Slowly the body may become insulin resistant, and that's not a good thing.

Click to expand...

Lol. Sugar has a medium glycemic index. Even rice has a higher glycemic index because digestion of sugar starts only at the small intestine while digestion of starch in rice starts at mouth itself. And of course bread has a very high glycemic index much higher than rice and sugar

Hahaha. Yes because sugar hits the blood stream directly spiking glucose levels and a diabetic's insulin response is hampered so the spike in glucose will last much longer than it would in a normal person. Moreover this continuous spiking can lead to a metabolic syndrome.
Natural Sugars and Processed Sugars need to be treated differently. Much of the carbohydrate in our food breaks down in to glucose. Glucose is essential for providing the body with energy. Typically we would like these carbs to be low on the glycemic index so that they take longer to digest and cause slow release of glucose in the system in comparison to white sugar or sugary drinks which will immediately dump glucose in to the blood stream.
If i am watching weight also i need to control my craving for carbs which is something that is closely connected to eating high sugar content and fatty food.
Also not everybody would have the same calorie requirement.. Depends on your gender, age, level if fitness activity, lifestyle, and food preferences.
A person on diet is recommended tea with very little milk(skim preferably) and no sugar.
Milk has nutrition value whereas Sugar has none..

Also your contention that full milk tea with sugar has 200kcal is a bit on the wild side. Nobody drinks one glass of tea made only out of milk. And if they do then they are probably not dieting. lol. Besides the caloric value milk by itself is not an issue, sugar is because it affects the blood glucose level. If someone is an athlete and needs instant energy then yes sugar can do it for them...

Calories in Tea - With and Without Milk or Sugar

Last Updated: Oct. 31, 2013

Tea, when nothing is added to it, has negligible, but not zero calories. According to theUSDA Nutrient Database (where all the figures here come from), a typical 8oz. cup of brewed black tea has 2.4 calories, which is almost nothing compared to the Recommended Daily Intake(RDI) of 2000 calories for a typical adult. The calories come mostly from trace amounts of carbohydrates in the tea leaf. The same is true for mostherbal teas. However, milk and sweeteners can add significant amounts of calories to tea.

Cubes of white, refined sugar; these add calories but no other nutritional value. Photo by Carioca, licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.Sugar adds empty calories
A typical teaspoon of refined (white) sugar amounts to about 4 grams of sugar, which has 15 calories. A typical sugar cube is about 2 grams, which has about 9 calories, and a typical sugar packet, like those served with tea or coffee in some restaurants, has about 3 grams, or 11 calories. These calories are also empty, in the sense that they impart no other nutritional value: no vitamins, minerals, or protein.Milk adds calories and nutrients
Milk or cream can be a big contributor to the calories in tea. These calories come from both sugars (like lactose, naturally occurring in dairy products) and fat in non-skim milk. One fluid ounce of whole milk (which is a lot more than most people put in their tea) has only 18 calories, 9 of which are from fat. Half-and-half has 39 calories per fluid ounce, 30 of which are from fat. Skim milk has 10 calories per fluid ounce, none of which is from fat.

Unlike sugar, milk also adds significant nutritional value. Milk contains protein, about 1 gram per fluid ounce, and some vitamin A, and also is a good source of calcium. Vitamin A is a fat-soluble vitamin, so it is not well-absorbed from skim milk.

How Many Calories Are in a Glass of Milk?
Last Updated: Aug 16, 2013 | By Michelle Lawson
Milk is a good source of calcium. Photo CreditJupiterimages/Comstock/Getty Images

Milk is a good source of calcium and vitamin D. Milk is not only a popular drink, but it is also used for cooking and in cereal. Milk is available as whole milk, 2 percent, 1 percent and skim.

Calories
One serving of whole milk is equal to 1 cup and contains 146 calories with 71 calories from fat. A 1 cup serving of 2 percent milk contains 122 calories with 43 calories from fat. The same serving of 1 percent milk contains 102 calories with 21 calories from fat. Each serving of skim milk contains 86 calories with 4 of those calories from fat.

why because diabetes is about blood sugar and so sugar should be avoided?

I don't blame you . even most doctors have the same stupid opinion.

Anyway, I will try explaining why it is stupid for the benefit of forum members here

A cup of coffee as typically consumed by Indians have milk in it which itself lactose and fat . so usually a cup of coffee usually has about 200kcal of calories. If a person is going to take sugar free coffee, it would hardly reduce the cal content by 20kcals Max. So instead of 200kcal, they would be consuming 180kcal.

The daily requirement of sugar by the normal person is 2300kcals. So tell me how exactly is reducing 20kcals doing to achieve anything wrt 2300kcals?